SEBI’s decision to create clearly defined scheme categories (and to limit fund houses to one scheme per category) was a big step towards empowering investors to make better scheme choices. It’s been a year since that came into effect and for the most part, it’s been a success. Unfortunately, some funds houses have found (or are finding) ways to wipe out the differences between schemes across different categories. While there is a need for SEBI to step in, investors also need to be vigilant, else we could end up holding a scheme that is quite different from what we expected it to be.
In this post, I want to share a few examples of the variety of ways in which fund houses have attempted to blur the differences between schemes in different categories. I have presented these in the form of a short quiz. There is a link to the answers at the end of the post.
Q1: Deceptive Descriptions
Given below are the descriptions of two open-end equity funds managed by a certain fund house. These descriptions have been taken from the fund house website. One of the schemes is classified as a ‘Mid Cap’ fund. Based on these descriptions, can you identify which one of these is the real ‘Mid Cap’ fund?
Fund A:
An open ended equity scheme predominately investing in mid cap stocks
Fund B:
…is primarily a Mid-cap fund which gives investors the opportunity to participate in the growth story of today's relatively medium sized but emerging companies which have the potential to be well-established tomorrow.
Q2: Deceptive Advertising
Given below are masked banner ads for two equity schemes managed by a single fund house. One of these schemes is classified as a ‘Focused’ fund, while the other is classified as a ‘Multi Cap’ fund. If you had been able to read the detailed descriptions (which are in smaller print), you might have been able to know which ad is for which scheme. But since these are website ads, which many will have seen (or will see) on mobile devices, the headlines become all the more important. Based on the headlines, can you identify which of these is the actual ‘Focused’ fund?
Fund C:
Fund D:
Q3: Deceptive Allocations
Going by SEBI’s definition, in the so-called ‘Balanced Advantage’ funds, the equity/ debt allocation is required to be managed “dynamically”. While some may consider that term to be all-encompassing, from what I have gathered, the purpose of having this category is to group those funds where the equity/ debt mix will be decided through a process of tactical asset allocation. As it happens, at least one fund house either has an extraordinarily restrictive interpretation of what ‘dynamic’ means or has chosen not to make tactical calls. The equity allocation of its ‘Balanced Advantage’ fund has remained in a remarkably narrow band and has had little resemblance to that of any other ‘Balanced Advantage’ fund. But it has had more than a passing resemblance to the equity allocation of the ‘Aggressive Hybrid’ fund managed by the same fund house. Given below is the unhedged equity allocation for the last 12 months for the two schemes. Based on this information, can you identify which of these is the ‘Aggressive Hybrid’ fund and which is the ‘Balanced Advantage’ fund?
Q4: Deceptive Risk Profile
‘Credit Risk’ Funds are required to have at least 65% of their portfolio in securities that are rated AA or lower. It is generally expected that these funds will carry a higher credit risk than any other class of debt funds. Given below is the latest rating profile, yield, and maturity of the portfolios of three debt funds, managed by a single fund house. Based on this information, can you identify which of these is the ‘Credit Risk’ fund?
| Fund G | Fund H | Fund I | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Portfolio Composition by Rating | |||
| Sovereign/ AAA/ Cash | 16% | 15% | 12% |
| AA+ | 9% | 9% | 11% |
| AA and lower | 75% | 76% | 77% |
| Average Maturity (years) | 3.1 | 3.4 | 2.9 |
| Portfolio Yield | 11.7% | 11.4% | 11.7% |
If you’d like to see the answers, click here.
